I assert that all of our Founding Fathers writing as Publius were expressing the concept of self governance, we,  the Great Body of People, elect from our midst those who will assemble together to determine our public policy and administration.

Before seeking a redress of our grievances first in a Court of Law, may I humbly commend upon each of us: the thought that: it is each of us and us collectively who will choose, from our midst, those we wish to determine our public policy and administration.

As a single non custodial father of two awesome young sons aged twenty-four and eight years of age, the choices seem abundantly clear to me. A quick reiteration of some points might somehow clarify my positions to the reader.

Those who espouse a belief in Father's and Children's Rights should be familiar with Social Security Act Title IV-D, if we took time to read the Act we might even find Title IV-E and others all of which are non-retirement income expenditures: although understanding the various SSA Titles to produce the funding for misandristic incentives, have we realized that non retirement income expenditures diminish the promise the Social Security Trust offered before 1964, and then, understand why there may be those who wish to allow individuals to privately invest those savings to keep the saved money out of an un-trusted general account? We have all read the peer reviewed empirical evidence demonstrating the criticality of Fathers to their Children's Development [or find the studies in the files section here: West Michigan DADS]

We have read about Joe Biden's authorship of VAWA, we have participated in the calls for VAWA to address all domestic violence, we wrote to Hillary while John Murtari was incarcerated, we have read R.A.D.A.R.'s [find MediaR.A.D.A.R here]reports.
Some of us at least have read Obama's Responsible Fatherhood Act that after three paragraphs of father involvement banalities paraphrased from the National Fatherhood Initiative [http://www.fatherhood.org/] and then reiterates child support sixty-five times.

We have ignored President Bushes Responsible Fatherhood Initiatives of 2005 which include Father access and involvement [http://fatherhood.hhs.gov/] et al and which directed the States in receipt of certain funds to become more Father Friendly We ignored the Federal Legislature passing on to Custodial Parents the "Child Support Collection Surcharge Fee" in the summer of 2008, announced by Republican Congressman Vern Ehlers and others. We should all be aware of Santorum's efforts, we know of Hoogendyk's, Steil's, Green's, Jansen's, Sheen's et al efforts to support Fathers, Families Children and Marriage. McCain has adopted the position of Father's Rights is a State issue the same position he takes on abortion. We have some certainty that McCain prefers a reduction of non retirement income expenditures from the Social Security portion of the General Fund. We know that the Federal Department of Justice holds that Duluth is not an appropriate therapy for Domestic Violence. No, McCain has not taken a flashy position on Father's Rights, or Children's Rights or Family Rights.

We could simply ask which candidates are most likely to advance our position in public policy: Republicans, as individuals and as a party have demonstrated a solid track record on that. We could read McCain Is Right On Father's Rights But Does He Know It? - Roger F. Gray [Gray's article here]
We could note that not all women are the same, and, certainly that NOW does not stand for all American women: NOW President Kim Gandy attacked Sarah Palin as soon as her Vice Presidential Candidacy was announced. Most telling is Gandy's recitation of Obama's and Biden's misandry in the NOW endorsement of their candidacy [Gandy's comments in NOW endorsement of Obama-Biden '08]

Maybe it is as simple as asking will you vote with NOW and VAWA or vote McCain-Palin for Father's Rights?

I am voting for McCain-Palin as recommended by Dr. Grayson Walker Ph.D.